Australia 46-53: Lindwall, Miller, Johnston
England 50s: Bedser, Trueman, Statham, Tyson
Aus early 60s: Davidson, McKenzie (with Benaud)
WI 60s: Hall, then Griffith too.
SA late 60s-60s: Pollock, Procter
England early 70s: Snow then Willis and a couple of solid blokes plus Underwood
Australia 70s: Lillee and Thomson, Walker, Gilmour
WI: well, a dozen of them
Aus 90s-00s: McGrath, McDermott, Hughes, Gillespie. Plus Warne obvs
India: the only time they had a really decent pacer since Dev: Zaheer, plus a bit of Sharma plus Lol-Sreesanth.
England: Glanderson, Tremlett, Broad, that Yorkshire buffoon who looks like he's just out of the pub (can't think of him), Finn.
Last edited by Burgey; 19-12-2011 at 10:30 PM.
WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
"People make me happy.. not places.. people"
"When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson
"Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn
People on here can blow as many loads as they like over spinners, it's a fact.
This thread isn't really about whether or not they have the potential to become a dominant #1 side though.
~ Cribbage ~
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since December 2009
The point is, if SL or anyone else, wants to be number one, they decent a stock of good or better quicks.
For countries like SL, that means breaking their pre-existing paradigms. Otherwise, you're happy with somewhere between 3-5 in the rankings long term.
And that stinks, if you're happy with that.
Being number one for a year is an achievement, but you can't tell me Zaheer + mediocre quick + good spinners = recipe for long term domination. Can't be.
haha.......at least get SL get back to really competitive rather than making them a dominant force overnight
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)